Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    August 28, 2011 12:30am-1:00am PDT

12:30 am
as you know from the property, we have these separate properties. you cannot go to another area from the parking lot. you have to make an informed decision. as you can see -- this is a rendering of what we proposed. these are the structures along o'farrell, and it is important to note the cited as we proposed and the height is to ensure we get over the obstructions.
12:31 am
it would not have two-hour parking typically surrounding @. these are the major way finding siphonage -- signs as you go into the parking lot. would cut down on the contest and issues and also cut down on traffic that could seep into the surrounding neighborhoods because people make the wrong decision and the need to circle around, given that o'farrell is a one-way street.
12:32 am
these animations will take you up and down o'farrell. the first reflect our proposed sign its height. we will show this first and then we will show a second animation that shows the proposed seven- foot level. the instructions and everything else, both animations are identical. it shows a difference between the 15-foot and the seven-foot height. we are driving up and down -- sorry. i apologize.
12:33 am
the key is we have cars on the street. we cars going into the parking lot. the key for the signs is to get above the instructions. as people are driving down o'farrell, they can make an informed decision. and they are not making a last- minute decision either. the cars that will be on the street and pedestrians coming from the high school -- it is really keep that decisions can be made and we're finding will be visible well in advance of the decision making time to make the turn. we have on suv there, just as an example. the sine it can be seen with larger vehicle obstruction's. -- the sign can be seen with larger vehicle obstructions.
12:34 am
this is the science we proposed. this one shows the signage at the acceptable level. all the conditions along the street are the same. in this case come up we have the second parking lot. the signs are not visible. there was an obstruction in the drive aisle. as you drive up, you see a sign. now you see it coming into making a last-minute decision to make a turn. this highlights the importance of having be signed it to be viewed from the streets without obstructions, and drivers can make decisions well in advance of their turn. giving that this is multi-tier parking, this is the way we can cut down on circulation issues,
12:35 am
cars coming in and out of the neighborhood. so, just to show you again -- the 15 and the seven-foot examples. and thank you very much for your time. president olague: i would like to open it up for public comment at this time. is there any public comment on this issue? on the issue of the -- ok, the presentation that was just made. >> as you did talk about integration. i am thinking about the neighborhoods surrounding the area. how are you going to integrate them into being part of that process? we spend our money in these communities. we are the biggest conglomerate as far as buying of any community, and i want to know how are you going to reintegrate people who live there into the building and into working and
12:36 am
being a part of that process in that community. president olague: thank you. is there any additional public comment on this item? >> i am president of the neighborhood association, and we are the association that abuts the center right on o'farrell street, and i would like to speak in support of creating the special sign district. the center has been struggling to attract customers and key tenants, and as you know, a large portion of the city is currently situated -- the center is an important shopping alternative for our neighborhood and the city in general, and
12:37 am
the committee feels it is extremely vital decenter survives. will support all the changes -- we support all the changes. we need the center to make this a viable again. i have lived across the street from the center on and off since 1957. there have been several owners. this group is the only group of owners that has actively engaged our neighborhood. they are constantly kept us up to date, informed, in the loop. we also feel that the proposed monument signs, the 15-foot level across o'farrell, currently customers are confused as to which lot they should enter. every day, several consumers overshoot their parking lot, and several tried to head the wrong
12:38 am
way on a one-way street. i did not even know -- i have lived there almost all my life -- i did not know they were there. they have got to be high enough that cars can see them. the situation right now creates a very hazardous situation. they do not look both ways. they are looking where they think the traffic is going to be, if they look at all. they are not going to see those cars. the plans include minimizing risk and controlling traffic. thank you. president olague: thank you. >> hello. good afternoon. i am confused parent. my son is starting at the high
12:39 am
school this fall. i have many, many times gone the wrong way trying to go to payless, mervyn's. i am the one waitperson. i have been in many many lots. i do applaud the open discussion on let's get the one-way traffic blowing and make -- flowing and make office depot accessible. she was talking about integration in the community. they do not want to shake hands with us on the subway. they are not opening their doors to give our teachers gift cards are any thought of appreciation. please honor the high school students beating they are part of the neighborhood. they want to come shopping.
12:40 am
please open their doors to us. i hope payless or mervyn's or anyone else in the neighborhood would shake hands with the students at our school. thank you. president olague: thank you. is there any additional public comment on this item? >> my name is jim wilter. i am directly opposite the parking lot entrance, and for many years, i watched the old sears sign -- not a very attractive sign, but it did not bother me. you have got to have the height, because i know i do not want to
12:41 am
have to dodge a sign -- a driver trying to redesign with type two small. i support the project. and thank you. president olague: is there additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini: thank you. i have a question for the project sponsor in regards to the sign at masonic and o'farrell, which staff is proposing to lower the height, but i assume your preference is to stay with the 35-foot height on the sign? >> yes. commissioner antonini: i wanted to clarify that. i agree with what you are saying. i'd like to support the project sponsor actually on the various items that came up. i think we have conformity in subjugating the blade signs
12:42 am
along gearty as was presented to keep that one main shopping center sign the predominant sign, which it is the only one now. i think those things are fine. as far as the windows, and the decorative elements that were introduced, i do not know that we need to allow these windows to be visible. first of all, i understand the windows cannot be opened anyway because most of the merchandisers have i asked for the ability to use the space for merchandise. so, he will see these blank windows there you cannot see through anyway, which is not attractive. they are not attractive when they were first built, in my opinion. i think the pattern there as presented by project sponsor would probably be preferable to nothing at all and seeing these
12:43 am
painted-out windows, which is all you will be able to have, because i think contractually, you are not going to be able to have open windows and show the inside of the store. so, on the height of the signs, i do agree with the 35-foot height on the directional sign at the corner of o'farrell and masonic that announces the center for those coming northbound on masonic and i support the 15-foot directional signs for the reasons presented, that being a one-way street. very hard to make your decision as to which it lot to get into, and when you to get into the wrong lot, it is difficult to get from one store to another. i had the experience of last year where i found street parking in december, in the evening. the lighting was not good. i was trying to get into best buy to buy a a giants world
12:44 am
series video for some friends for christmas, and you could not get in. there was no entrance on geary and masonic, and i assumed there would be 1. there was a lot of exercise going up the stairs to wear best buy was. anything you can do to make it easier for people, not only on pedestrians, but for vehicles to get to the right places, there will be a lot less people searching for parking. this can be done in a peaceful way. the fact that the signs are higher does not mean it is less desirable. i would support the concept in general, and i would ask that we go ahead and approve as proposed by project sponsor without staff modifications at the height of the signs. president olague: commissioner
12:45 am
fong? commissioner fong: thank you. i will take a littl different approach, commissioner antonini. i think we all looked at the sears site. my personal experience with that left-hand turn is the cars parked on the street would impede you from seeing which lot to go into. if we are serious about the parking spaces, if we shipped the parking spaces down, that will give more visibility turning in. i am ok with the proposed 15- foot, 17-foot signs. i would propose maybe a 20-foot larger sign. i honestly think that would probably be an improvement for the building and the landscaping, that the overall visual nature of the building is
12:46 am
better and folks will have an easier time. those are my thoughts. i think that is all. thank you. commissioner moore: i am very glad the project sponsor did some work and was able to present some visual solutions. i was talking with him earlier in the week. i was very much opposed to the approach, because it was just the same package as it was two or three weeks ago, which i did not approve of. however, i think the presentation about be modifications for the building appearance, facing the major streets -- i do believe that turning the signs to what you are showing, a singular sign with letters applied is the right way to go. in the corporate identity will
12:47 am
come from on board support it, what is really a grass-roots solution. turning back the building, i think, is extremely important. mr. miller, a could not see on your slide -- as to whether you were suggesting -- on the corner of masonic? you are showing this turn back into -- do i still see letters on there? i thought i did, but in not quite sure what you have in mind there. >> yes, we did a singular color. we did have a tenant lettering, as was previously proposed. the only change today was related to the colors of the screen's. >commissioner moore: we would like a uniform color, but he would still have distinguished
12:48 am
letters? >> the design was for three tenants, yes. commissioner moore: this is not applied to the window pane itself? this is suspended in front or in rear of the window? >> the screen would be in front of the window, actually mounted on the building, and the tenants sign it would be mounted on the screen. nothing would be mounted on the window itself. >> it is the same design. it is just the colors are changed. it would cover the area, and that is the fact. it would cover the same area. there would still be signed on at. the proposal is rather than having the yellows and the oranges, it is a series of great tons. commissioner moore: i can live with that. it would be nice to have silkscreen on the window itself, but that is probably asking too much, huh?
12:49 am
i think one of the problems has to do with parking on the left side of the street, as commissioner fong pointed out. i think it also has to do with it the signs being set too far back in the property. have you explored whether to move them closer, towards the street, towards the sidewalk side? >> the position of the signs we have shown are relatively close to the edge of the street. that are pretty much close to the edge of our property line. we put them as close as we can. so, the exact distance of each of their sons would still have to be determined. we tried to -- we tried to move
12:50 am
the buildings closer. commissioner moore: it looks like roosevelt to me. is completely suburban. it is taking a city street and making it like a suburban driveway. is something i have a problem with. is there any way we could study and help the developer move those, to give them at a lower height, which i am strongly opposed to? >> that was my concern as well, that they be more in keeping with the character of that st.. we can certainly replace them -- commissioner moore: the second
12:51 am
problem is they come massively 15-feet higher. taller signs on transparent legs so you can see the buildings beyond. so i would suggest the department pursue the lower sign category and find a way to help the developer sum up something. >> if i may, i think we share the same concern. we do not want people driving around the block the three times. clearly, the signs are needed. it is just a question of how tall they need to be to be visible and where they are placed. commissioner moore: 1 in coming into the driveway and see the signs, visible or not, and i am
12:52 am
not wearing glasses, if i passed the intersection, so to speak. should these signs be announcing the driveway, rather than marking the driveway? that is another way of doing it. a different approach to sign inch. -- signage. i prefer the former to the latter. i do not wear a glasses driving. that is another alternative we could work out with lower signs anyway. >> can i jump in with a question? it is on signs. can you have signs overhanging the sidewalk? cracks in the public right-of- way? no. -- >> in the public right of way? no. commissioner antonini: just to push the street out? >> i do not think you can.
12:53 am
you know better than i do. >> as with regular businesses, we have limits as to how much the suns can project over the sidewalk. -- signs can project over the sidewalk. commissioner antonini: we are considering a special assignment district. can we have something -- we're not going to resolve it today, i can tell. but this can follow along the lines of commissioner moore saying, that this can follow along the pole lines, overhang the sidewalk and come out further? maybe as commissioner moore and commissioner miguel indicated, having it come prior to the entry? i am quite open about how high these things are.
12:54 am
commissioner moore: i have a sense that everybody supports this standard to be realized and 60. is just a question of -- it is just a question of detail. of course, we wanted to be there, but i do not wanted to be a fallback. i wanted to be exciting and looking forward. is there anything you want to add to this? >> only that anything projecting over the sidewalk is subject to the encroachment permit. there will still be the process in place. commissioner miguel: it is the all important sign age. i was going to suggest putting
12:55 am
the scion prior to the opening, actually. so you can see it sooner by however wide that opening is. but at the far side, i think it would give you the few seconds of extra time to come in. i know you have a question of size of lettering and that type of fame. it would be very handy and not uncommon to say that an era of this way is for this location and an air of this way to what is coming up next -- arrow this way for what is coming up next. if they want business c, it is
12:56 am
coming up. they haven't missed it and they know where they are. those things might be explored as well. as well as the main building signs, as commissioner moore mentioned, i think they look much better now than they did before. i think the non-coloring is a decent comprimise. i was going to the material, and on the summary, i was noticing on page 3, the proposed ordinance would allow science to be added at a future date. i was not quite sure what that
12:57 am
implies. -- what that new lane implies. id doesn -- it doesn't say that. >> this sign package does not include that signed the they are suggesting we allow the special sign district. if the special sign district were to pass, as it was proposed in the future, it would be unallowable sign. as long as it meets the prescription.
12:58 am
>> what you are acting on today is recommendation of the ordinance. you actually are not of proving its. -- approving it. commissioner miguel: i didn't know if it meant a change up. >> the intent was that if there were hot pedestrian entrances, we could do that. commissioner sugaya: the whole thing seems backwards to me because we have to design and then we craft an ordinance. it seems ass backwards to me. i agree with most things the commissioners have said, but i don't like the lettering on the
12:59 am
screen. i hate the screen to begin with. i will make a motion anyway. i will make a motion to approve the special sign district with the following modifications, that the masonic sign not be taller than 20 feet. i don't want to set a high. do we have to have the ordinance? >> [inaudible] president olague: no taller than 15 or no taller than
left
right